How should physicians make decisions about mandatory reporting when a patient might become violent?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Mandatory reporting of persons believed to be at imminent risk for committing violence or attempting suicide can pose an ethical dilemma for physicians, who might find themselves struggling to balance various conflicting interests. Legal statutes dictate general scenarios that require mandatory reporting to supersede confidentiality requirements, but physicians must use clinical judgment to determine whether and when a particular case meets the requirement. In situations in which it is not clear whether reporting is legally required, the situation should be analyzed for its benefit to the patient and to public safety. Access to firearms can complicate these situations, as firearms are a well-established risk factor for violence and suicide yet also a sensitive topic about which physicians and patients might have strong personal beliefs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)29-35
Number of pages7
JournalAMA Journal of Ethics
Volume20
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Mandatory Reporting
physician
Firearms
Physicians
Violence
Suicide
suicide
violence
Confidentiality
statute
scenario
Safety
human being

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

How should physicians make decisions about mandatory reporting when a patient might become violent? / Barnhorst, Amy V; Wintemute, Garen J; Betz, Marian E.

In: AMA Journal of Ethics, Vol. 20, No. 1, 01.01.2018, p. 29-35.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a2879562039b46239f2dccecce9ed2e7,
title = "How should physicians make decisions about mandatory reporting when a patient might become violent?",
abstract = "Mandatory reporting of persons believed to be at imminent risk for committing violence or attempting suicide can pose an ethical dilemma for physicians, who might find themselves struggling to balance various conflicting interests. Legal statutes dictate general scenarios that require mandatory reporting to supersede confidentiality requirements, but physicians must use clinical judgment to determine whether and when a particular case meets the requirement. In situations in which it is not clear whether reporting is legally required, the situation should be analyzed for its benefit to the patient and to public safety. Access to firearms can complicate these situations, as firearms are a well-established risk factor for violence and suicide yet also a sensitive topic about which physicians and patients might have strong personal beliefs.",
author = "Barnhorst, {Amy V} and Wintemute, {Garen J} and Betz, {Marian E.}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.1.ecas1-1801",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "29--35",
journal = "AMA journal of ethics",
issn = "2376-6980",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How should physicians make decisions about mandatory reporting when a patient might become violent?

AU - Barnhorst, Amy V

AU - Wintemute, Garen J

AU - Betz, Marian E.

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Mandatory reporting of persons believed to be at imminent risk for committing violence or attempting suicide can pose an ethical dilemma for physicians, who might find themselves struggling to balance various conflicting interests. Legal statutes dictate general scenarios that require mandatory reporting to supersede confidentiality requirements, but physicians must use clinical judgment to determine whether and when a particular case meets the requirement. In situations in which it is not clear whether reporting is legally required, the situation should be analyzed for its benefit to the patient and to public safety. Access to firearms can complicate these situations, as firearms are a well-established risk factor for violence and suicide yet also a sensitive topic about which physicians and patients might have strong personal beliefs.

AB - Mandatory reporting of persons believed to be at imminent risk for committing violence or attempting suicide can pose an ethical dilemma for physicians, who might find themselves struggling to balance various conflicting interests. Legal statutes dictate general scenarios that require mandatory reporting to supersede confidentiality requirements, but physicians must use clinical judgment to determine whether and when a particular case meets the requirement. In situations in which it is not clear whether reporting is legally required, the situation should be analyzed for its benefit to the patient and to public safety. Access to firearms can complicate these situations, as firearms are a well-established risk factor for violence and suicide yet also a sensitive topic about which physicians and patients might have strong personal beliefs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064163665&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85064163665&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.1.ecas1-1801

DO - 10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.1.ecas1-1801

M3 - Article

C2 - 29360025

AN - SCOPUS:85064163665

VL - 20

SP - 29

EP - 35

JO - AMA journal of ethics

JF - AMA journal of ethics

SN - 2376-6980

IS - 1

ER -